QUESTION: -- more opportunities of doing
something acceptable to you; and if not, what are the
chances of its coming?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I think it is a very
important step in the right direction.

In that connection, I would like to read you
something. I went to Jefferson Junior High School here in
the District several weeks ago, and spoke to kids, to
parents, to teachers, and to administrators. One young
lady left me a letter.

And she said: You continue to express your
feelings for the students. You state that the children are
the future and that more things should be done to keep
students in after-school activities. Why don't you take
more action, and get out into the communities around D.C.,
see what it is like for students who need more support and
better role models, try to experience what they go through.
Because if you don't see it through their eyes, the eyes of
the children, who will you see it through -- statistics,
graphs, charts?

Our futures depend on what we see and hear.
How many students actually know who you are or what you
have done? What have you done?

(Laughter.)

QUESTION: And don't give me a list. Don't
give me a speech. What do you really feel about the
children? Show us in your actions, not your words.

And this was a student. I invited her --
she said, please call me. So I contacted her. And she's a
wonderful young lady. She and her mother and sisters and a
friend came to visit. And we had a chance to talk directly
to each other. And I explained what I have been trying to
do. I said, I do not want to give a speech, but I can give
you some specific examples that you can review.

But we talked about the need for
after-school programs for mentors who know how to relate to
kids, for networks that provide kids support.

Yesterday I was out at another Jefferson,
Jefferson Middle School, in Virginia. And it was again so
rewarding to hear from the kids about the needs. We have
an opportunity to try to get monies out that provide a
balance between prevention and enforcement. And I think
the House is a step in the right direction.

QUESTION: Ms. Reno --

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: What are you doing?

(Laughter.)

QUESTION: What do you think is lacking in
the House measure that you would like to see put in before
the bill passes?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I think it is best
if we just work through it as it works through conference.
But let me just list the ingredients. We have got to hold
the young people accountable for their crimes. We have got
to let them know that there is no excuse for committing a
crime and they are going to face the consequences.

I think it is important, however, to provide
for after-care. It makes no sense to put a kid in
detention for a year and then, as I have said to many
times, send him back to the open-air drug market where he
got into trouble in the first place without a support
mechanism in place for him there, without a chance to get
back into school, without a chance to develop a skill that
can enable him to earn a living wage.

But then, let's look at the front. When a
kid gets in trouble for the first time for a minor offense,
instead of just giving him a slap in the wrist, let's find
out what the problem is. And if there is a problem that
caused the crime, if he is living with crack addicts in an
apartment over the open-air drug market, let's try to do
something about it now so that he has a chance of success.

Let's provide for flexibility for
communities across America to figure out how we do it. I
go next week, to visit with the Conference of Mayors, who
are doing wonderful things in terms of prevention. I think
all of us working together can hear the voices of sheriffs,
of Nefratenay Francis, who wrote this letter, of chiefs of
police, of school administrators, of citizens who care.
And we can give children the chance to grow in a strong and
positive way.

QUESTION: Ms. Reno, unfortunately, as
important as youth crime is, there is another subject which
is using up all the oxygen.

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I know of nothing
more important. There are many things that are important.
I know nothing more important than the future of America's
children.

QUESTION: However, there is another subject
which is using up all the oxygen in this town. A short
while ago, Chairman Hyde told the Judiciary Committee that
stories would start to appear about the backgrounds, or
scandals, lurking in their history. And he said, once they
did, if it appears it will constitute obstruction of
justice, there would be a referral to the Justice
Department for investigation.

Now Chairman Hyde has admitted to his own --
what he has described -- youthful indiscretion. Has there
been any contact from the Judiciary Committee, asking for
an investigation of such stories or -- either about
Chairman Hyde or anyone else?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: Not to my knowledge.

QUESTION: Would such an action
constitute -- could such an action constitute obstruction
of justice or obstruction of a direct inquiry?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I can't do "what
ifs." We would look at it if it were referred.

QUESTION: You would look at it?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I mean we would look
at it to determine what the appropriate course of action
would be.

QUESTION: There are going to be more
stories of this nature. And you can look at it two ways.
You live by the sword, you die by the sword -- or you can
say is this an obstruction of justice? Is the Department
prepared to at least look at the nature of these stories or
the origin of these stories and deal with them?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: As I just told
Beverley, we will look at it, and then determine what the
appropriate course of action would be. I cannot tell you
what it is until I get it.

QUESTION: Have you read the Starr report on
President Clinton?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I have not read it
in detail.

QUESTION: Do you have any reaction that you
can share with us today about what you have seen of it?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: No. As you know, I
have steadfastly said that with respect to independent
counsel matters I will not comment.

QUESTION: Ms. Reno, that being the case, we
understand you can't discuss or give your opinion on
anything that the Independent Counsel does. May I ask you,
though, whether you can say anything about the decision by
Congress to release everything, all the grand jury material
that was gathered? This is a congressional decision. Does
that raise concerns for you, with all this material that
was gathered in secret, what's to be said about the secrecy
of a grand jury in a case like this?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: This issue has been
raised by a number of people who have asked me. I have not
reviewed it in detail, and so I do not think it would be --
I think it would be premature for me to comment.

QUESTION: With all due respect, why is it
that you have not read the report in detail or reviewed
that question in detail?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: From what I have
heard, nobody would really read it in detail. They would
read it to find out the substance of it and what the issues
were. But there are some details that I do not think I
have to read.

QUESTION: Are there exceptions in cases
where grand jury testimony is released?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: Again, that issue
has been raised on a number of occasions. I do not know
the answer to it. And it would be premature for me to
comment.

QUESTION: Can you even comment as to
whether this report is a competent investigation on the
part of Starr and his people?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I would, as I have
said, not comment on the investigation done by the
Independent Counsel. The purpose of having an independent
counsel is so that he or she can be independent.

QUESTION: Ms. Reno, with regard to your
campaign finance preliminary, can you clarify whether
Republican activities will be looked at as well as
Democratic?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: We have said from
the beginning that we will pursue every lead.

QUESTION: On the same subject, have you
written a letter to Carl Levin?

(Laughter.)

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: Excuse me. For
those of you who cannot see, there is a photographer
sitting down here.

QUESTION: Have you answered Carl Levin's
letter? It's about five weeks now since Senator Levin sent
you a letter, saying that there was information that at
least suggested that the House Majority Whip had
participated in a scheme in Texas to route campaign funds
illegally through a third-party conduit. Have you
responded to Senator Levin's letter yet?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I do not know
whether they have responded yet or not.

QUESTION: Ms. Reno, what sort of role model
do you think President Clinton has provided, given the
Starr report and what has come out over the last week or
so?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I think that
there -- as people point out, how do you explain to
children these circumstances? And I think it is something
that parents are grappling with, trying to explain the role
of the President, what his role is as a person. And I
think it creates problems for parents that they are
struggling to address.

QUESTION: When you have been to the
Jefferson schools that you talked about, do any of the kids
ask you about the scandal?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: No.

QUESTION: No single kid has asked you about
it?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I do not recall any.

QUESTION: How would you explain it to
children?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I think one of the
best descriptions I heard was from a friend of mine, who
said she had sat down with her son and she had talked with
him. He is old enough to understand what he is hearing on
television for the most part. And she has explained that
people make mistakes and that they are not perfect, but
that you have got to move on and acknowledge your mistakes,
put them behind you, and not let it defeat you for the rest
of your life.

QUESTION: President Clinton has said on
several occasions that he has sinned, but he has not been
at all specific about the manner in which he has sinned and
whether there has been any sex in the sin or whether there
has been any lying in this sin. Do you find this to be
just smoke?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I do not know what
you mean by "just smoke," but since it relates to the
Independent Counsel's investigation, I'm not going to
comment on it.

QUESTION: Attorney General, from the
standpoint of a prosecutor, is the release of videotaped
grand jury testimony a troubling precedent?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: Again, these are the
issues that I think it would be premature for me to comment
on.

QUESTION: And why is that? Is the Office
of Legal Counsel or anyone else here dealing with a
position on this question?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I just think it
would be premature for me to comment at this point.

QUESTION: (Off microphone) -- in your
prosecutorial career on which grand jury testimony was
released -- have you always considered it sacred and should
always stay under wraps?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I think the Florida
grand jury law may be somewhat different than the Federal
grand jury law, so I cannot compare one to the other. And
anything I might say with reference to my Florida
experience, where grand juries provided full reports, there
were provisions for reports and grand jury information was
made available pursuant to presentments of reports. It
might not apply with respect to Federal grand juries.

QUESTION: Ms. Reno, you said you haven't
read the report in detail, but certainly you have read the
grounds for impeachment, haven't you? Based on the
summaries of the preliminaries that you cited --

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I have read -- as I
say, I have read it, but not in detail. And that would
include -- I have read it sufficient to understand the
ground.

QUESTION: Have you ever prosecuted someone
for perjury?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: Have I ever
prosecuted somebody for perjury?

QUESTION: Yes.

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: Yes.

QUESTION: Ms. Reno, speaking strictly
historically -- and you are as up on this as I am - do you
know of any instance in American history where this
particular type of grand jury information has been
released, without judging the Starr investigation or
anything else?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I have not reviewed
it, so I cannot speak with informed knowledge of history.
I cannot think of a situation like this. But that would
not necessarily be the most thorough answer that could be
given after research.

QUESTION: When you say it's premature for
you to comment on the release of grand jury material, at
what point would it be appropriate for you to comment?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: When I have got all
the information necessary to make an appropriate and
informed comment.

QUESTION: So you do not necessarily have to
wait until the Independent Counsel's investigation is
finished before you can judge this particular issue?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I do not know
whether I have to judge this particular issue. But it is
an issue, a question, that has been raised. At this point,
I do not have the answers.

QUESTION: Have you sought the answers,
asked anyone to predict?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: There has been
discussion about it.

QUESTION: Does your office have access to
the Starr report and the materials that are entrusted to
the House, those that are locked up over there in the
House? Do you have an interest to know what is in there,
or can you have access?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: At this point, we
have access to the report that was released, and we will
see what else is released and what is necessary.

QUESTION: Just so we are not missing
something here, I assume the Department is not
contemplating any legal action to prevent the release of
this material?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: There is no basis
for the Department doing that so far as I know.

QUESTION: Is the Department looking to file
new charges against Eric Rudolph? Can you characterize
what those discussions are right now?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I would not comment
on that. As you know, it is pending.

QUESTION: Ms. Reno, is it your
understanding that the Department has prosecuted before for
perjury in civil cases? I realize you may not have
numbers. And, secondly, is it your understanding that
while it is not a frequent occurrence, but clearly perjury
is held the same in civil and criminal proceedings?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I do not know
whether -- I cannot give you a specific case in which the
Department has -- I understood the question here to be,
have I ever prosecuted anybody for perjury? And the answer
is yes. Whether the Department has prosecuted anyone for
perjury in a civil action, I cannot give you specifics. I
will ask Bert to give you whatever is available.

QUESTION: Ms. Reno, let me ask on a
different subject, the confirmation of judges. About a
year ago, you were somewhat critical, as was the Chief
Justice, in the case of confirmations in the Senate, and
also the fact that the process was extremely partisan. Are
you satisfied that is has improved in the Senate, and the
fact that your friend, Patricia Sykes, is about to become a
judge?

And a related question: Why -- (off
microphone) -- been more successful in getting judges
through the process than a number of others?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I do not know the
answer to that. And I do not know whether they have been
more successful or not. But I think that there has been a
good effort made to get more judges confirmed. I think it
is very important that these judges have their hearings,
that there is a vote, that we get these judicial vacancies
filled. And I think everybody is in agreement on that now.
And I look forward to working with Senator Hatch and the
Judiciary Committee to do everything we can to continue to
get them confirmed.

QUESTION: Ms. Reno, as a member of this
Cabinet, what are your thoughts on the effectiveness -- Mr.
Clinton's ability to govern in light of this report?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: All I can say is,
with respect to the issues that I am dealing with, he is --
civil rights, law enforcement issues -- he continues to be
fully informed. I continue to be impressed with his grasp
of the situation, with his ability to absorb all the facts
and make good decisions.

QUESTION: Are you contact with Mrs. Clinton
at all?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I have seen
Mrs. Clinton.

QUESTION: And how does she seem to you?
Did you have any discussions with her?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: Well, it has now
been about a month ago. And I saw her yesterday, as well.
But she and the President had a dinner at which we had the
opportunity to hear from children's advocates and from
others who have, by reporting or otherwise, have focused on
children's issues. And she was, as usual, so informed and
facilitated such an excellent discussion. Again, I was
impressed with it.

QUESTION: At the Cabinet meeting last week,
did you make any comments?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: No.

QUESTION: Did you get any?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: Yes.

QUESTION: And you didn't make any comments
at the meeting or after meeting with the President?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I went up to the
President and shook his hand and said that I appreciated
the opportunity to hear.

QUESTION: Ms. Reno, have you reached any
conclusion yet in connection with the matter you were asked
about a week ago as to whether the Department had the
proper role in defending the institution of the presidency
in any impeachment investigation?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I have had some
initial briefings from OLC, which is the Office of Legal
Counsel. We have not reached any conclusion. I think we
will have to do it as the issues arise.

QUESTION: (Off microphone) -- from that
what the practice was in the past? For example, I guess
the only time this has ever gone to trial in the Senate
before is the case of Andrew Johnson. And did your
briefing include -- we were checking around here, trying to
figure out what the Department did then -- do people around
here have any idea whether the Justice Department has ever
done anything like this before?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: It is hard to say,
because I am not sure of all the facts and circumstances of
the Johnson trial and whether there was an independent
counsel or the equivalent thereof. So there are a number
of issues. And, again, we are working through them.

QUESTION: I think Jack Keeney was an intern.

(Laughter.)

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: Speaking of Mr.
Keaney, for those who may be listening that do not know
him, John Keaney has been in the Department for many years.
He is an example for this Nation of what a public servant
should be. At a time when people are questioning whether
they want to continue to pursue public service because of
the fishbowl that it puts you in, Mr. Keaney continues, day
in and day out, to have such a sense of justice, a wisdom,
a commitment to this Nation.

And if you look at this life -- as I recall,
if you walk into his office, there is a bomber from World
War II; I think he served either as a pilot or as a
navigator -- and you look at his life, and you can still
turn to young people and say, there is an example of why
public service is some of the most rewarding experience
that you can have.

QUESTION: Ma'am at the alternative dispute
resolution thing earlier this week. From that, the Federal
Government seems to be doing pretty good on that. How does
the Federal Government compare to the private sector? Are
they equivalent?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I think, in some
respects, we have been behind the private sector. And I
think there are some in the private sector who want nothing
to do with what I call appropriate dispute resolution. And
let me explain just a little bit about what I mean by that.

There are an awful lot of lawyers who
receive a case and decide they are going to trial. And
they may settle at the last minute, but it will be at great
cost, and oftentimes the settlement will net the client
very little. Or if it is a settlement that everybody
agrees on, or if it goes to trial and the client gets a
money judgment, that money judgment may not be as good as a
settlement would be that provided for corrections and
modifications and contributions to a certain project that
would enhance the area that was the subject of the lawsuit.

When I went to law school, people did not
talk about negotiation. You did not learn how to
negotiation. Now I think it is clear that you can teach
people to negotiation effectively.

And what we are trying to do is to work with
our client agencies whom we represent, the Federal agencies
we represent, and say, the first thing we have got to do is
value the case and understand the risk, and have a good
understanding of the case so that we can intelligently
figure out what it is worth and what should happen and how
it should be disposed of.

Then we need to use our negotiation skills.
And we are training our lawyers to be better negotiators.
Then sometimes negotiation will not work between the
parties because they will have a tension. At that point,
it might be appropriate to bring in mediators or
third-party neutrals who can bring down the temperature a
little bit and get it resolved.

It is so important because we are seeing, in
terms of equal opportunity complaints and work place
complaints, that if we work the issues out through
mediation or through negotiation, we save the wear and tear
of a trial and the tensions and the bitterness and the
dissention that are created sometimes in a trial situation.
It is just a very important undertaking.

And I think it can be mirrored in the
community by police officers and teachers learning how to
resolve disputes and how to teach youngsters how to resolve
disputes without knives and guns and fists. What it is
basically about is how do you problem-solve, how do you
listen so that you understand what the other person is
saying.

I sit around this table sometimes and I
realize that I may not have listened carefully enough to
your question. I think it behooves us all to listen with a
listening ear, to hear the other person out, to respond in
clear terms, to learn truly how to communicate. I think we
have made some real progress in the Department of Justice.

I am proud of the work that Peter Steelon
and so many of the United States Attorneys Offices have
done in training our lawyers in appropriate dispute
resolution techniques. And I am very proud of the work
that a number of the Federal agencies, including EPA and
the Air Force and others have done in this area. I think
we can do much more.

QUESTION: Ms. Reno, going back to the Starr
report, are you satisfied now, having seen part of the
report, that you did the right thing to put Ken Starr on
this particular subject, when the tapes came to his
attention and he came to you about this matter; was that
the right move?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: Again, while the
Independent Counsel is handling a matter, I do not comment.
I have just said that from the beginning, and I would
adhere to it.

QUESTION: And then I hear you say that
there might be some decisionmaking required by you and your
Department with regard to the impeachment if in fact the
House decides to take up the matter; would this be
something you would want to decide about a priori?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: We will look -- as I
indicated, I have asked the Office of Legal Counsel to
pull, and it has made available to the media, as I
understand it, some of the public documents with respect to
past studies of impeachment. We are reviewing it to make
sure that we are prepared, as the issues may arise. It
depends on how the issues arise and what the issues are.

But where the institution of the presidency
is at issue, I think it will be important for us to be
informed, to make appropriate determinations as to whether
we should be involved to address and to protect the
institution of the presidency.

QUESTION: And, finally, did I hear you
correctly that you would be able to say more about the
Starr report and the whole impeachment matter as time goes
on and as you learn more and as more is made public about
it?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: If I said that, I
was in error. Because what I think I said was that we will
review the issues as they arise. And if there is an issue
that we should be involved in, in terms of protecting the
institution of the presidency or supporting the institution
of the presidency, then it may be appropriate for us to be
involved. But we will have to look at it, look at our
particular role, and see best how to play it.

QUESTION: Ms. Reno, a follow-up from the
earlier questions. When you thanked the President the
other day after the Cabinet meeting, did he say anything in
response?

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: Thank you for
coming.

QUESTION: And the other question is, who do
you favor in the season home run competition, Mark McGwire
or Sammy Sosa?

(Laughter.)

ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO: I think that Mark
McGwire and Sammy Sosa have done such a wonderful,
wonderful thing for this Nation. And I would not dare ever
favor one over the other. I think they both have been
splendid. They are each different people with different
backgrounds. But their magnificent feat, just today, is
historic. But more so, they seem to be such great people.
And the sportsmanship that they have evidenced is just
wonderful.

And then to see how contagious it is with
the kids -- the kids who come in with the ball, the 60th
home run, the 61st home run -- it has just been almost
magical.